Re: UML time-travel warning from __run_timers

[Thomas Gleixner]

On Mon, Apr 04 2022 at 10:37, Johannes Berg wrote:
> On Mon, 2022-04-04 at 10:32 +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>> --- a/kernel/time/timer.c
>> +++ b/kernel/time/timer.c
>> @@ -1724,9 +1724,8 @@ static inline void __run_timers(struct t
>>  		/*
>>  		 * The only possible reason for not finding any expired
>>  		 * timer at this clk is that all matching timers have been
>> -		 * dequeued.
>> +		 * dequeued or no timer has been ever queued.
>>  		 */
>> -		WARN_ON_ONCE(!levels && !base->next_expiry_recalc);
>> 
>
> So I'm pretty sure we don't even need to test a patch simply removing
> the WARN_ON_ONCE() since the entire problem Vincent reported was hitting
> the WARN_ON_ONCE :)

:)

> (And I'm pretty sure I did at some point test some additional condition
> inside it)
>
> Are you going to merge that patch?

Let me write a coherent changelog.